perfct skin retouch

[madclark]

Craig, I think you're being a little harsh.

As posted above, it would be nice to see what the original photograph looked like for comparison. You can tell the retouching is heavy handed, but the techniques used seem well-executed. You should at least be able to acknowledge the completeness of the picture even if you disagree with the retouch. And if you can't, then your comments are best kept to yourself. You've taken the opportunity to show off your own work while slamming the original post at the same time in a "look at me, pay attention to me" way. Very uncool.

I agree the original poster needs to recognize that the retouch has pushed the boundaries of realistic portrayal, but I feel it's our role to guide and advise, to help them realize the positives and negatives of that, and not use this forum as an opportunity for drive-by self-promotion and criticism.

And RocketScientist, with retouching we have to go beyond just ensuring the clients is happy but also informed. If they like this retouch, good for them. But if they don't realize that the retouch is heavy-handed, because the the retoucher is either uninformed or inexperienced, you do a disservice to the client. With clients not in the photography business, they really won't know what they want and are looking to the retoucher for guidance. That's the way in any creative consulting business.

[Craig_H]

Originally Posted by madclark

Craig, I think you're being a little harsh.

Do you think anyone is going to get anywhere or improve if their peers tiptoe around criticism?

Originally Posted by madclark

You can tell the retouching is heavy handed, but the techniques used seem well-executed.

That really makes no sense to me. If techniques are well executed, then surely the end result would not look so overdone?!

Originally Posted by madclark

You should at least be able to acknowledge the completeness of the picture even if you disagree with the retouch.

Not sure what you mean by completeness...

[aaRonology101]

yea, the original is always good for comparison, but from what i see, it looks way over done. i cant even say that it looks to perfect. its way to pastey.

got to keep in mind of skin texture. once you lose that, you will lose the realism of the picture.

my advice .. less cloning and painting, and more dodgeing and burning ..

[ElectronicLady]

Originally Posted by TheVeed

I did a very crisp retouch here: http://theveed.com/pages/images/nnennacloseup.jpg
where I left pores and texture and added absolutely no extra texture (it did help that the model was already stunning in the original.)

I loved your retouch of
http://theveed.com/pages/images/nnennacloseup.jpg

I frequently need to retouch African American skin and would like some pointers. My questions are

How do you even out the skin color?
how do I determine if the coloring is right?
How do you leave the shine in without it looking oily?
How do you remove the blotches and imperfections within the shine?

Are there any tutorials you can refer me to?

Thanks for your patience with ALL my elementary questions

[TheVeed]

Originally Posted by ElectronicLady

I loved your retouch of
http://theveed.com/pages/images/nnennacloseup.jpg

I frequently need to retouch African American skin and would like some pointers. My questions are

How do you even out the skin color?
how do I determine if the coloring is right?
How do you leave the shine in without it looking oily?
How do you remove the blotches and imperfections within the shine?

Are there any tutorials you can refer me to?

Thanks for your patience with ALL my elementary questions

It didn't hurt that the model is stunningly beautiful to begin with. But a lot of your questions can be answered by a number of people in this forum. I guess the only answer I can give you is to really learn your Dodge & Burn, and read the tutorials on that. Most everything else you've asked can easily be found by reading other tutorials.

[Lasa]

If people can make a ultra smooth skin without it looking blurred..great! If that's the look you are going for more power to you. The ultra super model flawlessness look has its place ( I like it), looks great when you are selling an image everybody knows is touched up unreal etc.. but its a little out of place if used for your senior high school picture... It seems like its vogue to like textured skin, it looks ok on some images and not so good (as in bad) on others...it has its place.

Lasa

[Arandel]

The concept of good retouching varies between cultures, as it is clearly shown here. If you look at any kind of published material (whether it be magazines, CD covers, etc) from Eastern Europe, the Middle East - or Asia in general, the type of work presented by nabegh73 is what dominates their media markets. That perception of glamour is contrasted by the Western retouching ideal, where texture is everything. However, I agree with Nancy, a lot of fashion magazines out there present us with heavily blurred images - surprisingly also high-end ones (and yes, I can back this statement up with brand names).

[blansky]

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

Are we so isolated in our own little world that we can't see that this example is over retouched to the point of absurdity.

It's a great exercise in using photoshop tools. It reminds me of the hilarious trend in the 80s of women using red to highlight their cheeks, (which they copied from fashion magazines,) so they looked liked they'd just been in a bar fight.

Michael

[Arandel]

I do believe the isolation in this case lays in the fact of some people being unable to appreciate the esthetic values of other cultures, in this instance that of Lebanon. But as I also mentioned earlier, this type of retouching is prevalent in most Eastern civilizations. The burning question here is rather about cultural imperialism, where people at this forum - mainly from the Western civilization, feel that their techniques and ideals are superior. Veed even went so far as to describe Nabegh's effort as a universal folly. You all have to excuse me, but I fail to see how anybody can make such a generic judgement based on their apparently limited personal experiences. Why not, as Nancy also suggested, try to see the pieces up for critique from the retouchers perspective and background. There is so much to be learnt, and isolating ourselves from different ideas and influences is plain ignorant.

[TheVeed]

Arandel, you bring up some good points, but ultimately, I must say, I completely disagree with you.

Most magazines in the middle east, as you speak of, may employ that type of 'smooth' retouching, but that is more due to a lack of high-end retouchers available to their clients, and budget contraints. It is NOT a 'trend' or whatever else excuse it has been labeled as. It is poor retouching. If they had the available resources, they would outsource their retouching to the higher-end hotspots, such as London, Paris, NY, the list goes on. There are very few cities that can lay claim to having a retouching industry, but rest assured, their clients are from all over the world.

There is a difference in applying texture to skin, and maintaining/perfecting the texture that is already there. Applying texture to skin is poor retouching as well, but it recognizes that skin has a texture. NO texture on the skin is the easiest, and most beginner-level technique in doing a 'glamour' retouch. I'm not knocking on the original poster by that comment, because we've ALL been there. What I'm saying is, it's not right to try to encourage it and mislabel it as a 'trend.'

Any magazine, regardless of nation, can have good or bad retouching. In NO good retouching will you see skin as unnaturally smooth as the original post. Show me ONE photo, from a high-end magazine, that is a face close-up, that has skin as texture-free. Printed high-end retouched photos that look smooth actually DO have texture, but smaller, not as sharp, and less defined texture. But like I said before, it's not perfectly smooth.

Perfectly smooth retouching does have its place, in art and graphic pieces. But it goes against the very principles of retouching, which are to perfect what is already given, not to remove all reality from it. Claiming anything otherwise is, quite honestly, just absurd.

[Ant]

Going to back up Veed here.

The image stinks in any culture. Any other words just give too much credit to this thread which already has too much discussion and views and is ridiculous.

[vkg1]

My opinion is that she looks too fake. Reducing the opacity of the eye white correction layer would be the first thing I would do to address this.